*US "Created" ISIS As A "Tool" To Overthrow Syria's President Assad*
*---*
*just more US interventionist failure experienced by both dems and repubs.*


On Friday, August 12, 2016 at 12:30:26 PM UTC-5, MJ wrote:
>
> May 24, 2015 
>
> *Secret Pentagon Report Reveals US "Created" ISIS As A "Tool" To Overthrow 
> Syria's President Assad *by Tyler Durden 
>
> From the first sudden, and quite dramatic, appearance of the fanatical 
> Islamic group known as ISIS which was largely unheard of until a year ago, 
> on the world's stage and which promptly replaced the worn out and tired al 
> Qaeda as the world's terrorist bogeyman, we suggested that the "*straight 
> to beheading YouTube clip*" purpose behind the Saudi Arabia-funded 
> Islamic State 
> <http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/06/14/america-s-allies-are-funding-isis.html>was
>  
> a simple one: use the Jihadists as the vehicle of choice to achieve a 
> political goal: depose of Syria's president Assad, who for years has stood 
> in the way of a critical Qatari natural gas pipeline 
> <http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-05-16/mystery-sponsor-weapons-and-money-syrian-rebels-revealed>,
>  
> one which could dethrone Russia as Europe's dominant - and belligerent - 
> source of energy, reaching an interim climax with the unsuccessful 
> Mediterranean Sea military build up of 2013, which nearly resulted in 
> quasi-world war.
>
> The narrative and the plotline were so transparent, even Russia saw right 
> through them. Recall from September of last year 
> <http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-09-11/russia-warns-obamas-two-faced-strategy-syria-will-lead-huge-escalation-middle-east-a>
> :
>
> If the West bombs Islamic State militants in Syria without consulting 
> Damascus, LiveLeak reports 
> <http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=760_1410383985#Iv1gTyxwvHzlfUFs.99> that 
> the anti-ISIS alliance may use the occasion to launch airstrikes against 
> President Bashar Assad’s forces, according to Russian Foreign Minister 
> Sergey Lavrov. Clearly comprehending that Obama's new strategy against 
> ISIS in Syria is all about pushing the Qatar pipeline through 
> <http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-05-16/mystery-sponsor-weapons-and-money-syrian-rebels-revealed>
>  (as 
> was the impetus behind the 2013 intervention push) 
> <http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-05-16/mystery-sponsor-weapons-and-money-syrian-rebels-revealed>,
>  
> Russia is pushing back noting that the it is using ISIS as a pretext for 
> bombing Syrian government forces and warning that "such a development would 
> lead to a huge escalation of conflict in the Middle East and North Africa."
>
> But it's one thing to speculate; it's something entirely different to have 
> hard proof.
>
> And while speculation was rife that just like the CIA-funded al Qaeda 
> <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/15/world/asia/cia-funds-found-their-way-into-al-qaeda-coffers.html?_r=0>had
>  
> been used as a facade by the US to achieve its own geopolitical and 
> national interests over the past two decades, so ISIS was nothing more than 
> al Qaeda 2.0, there was no actual evidence of just this.
>
> That may all have changed now when a declassified secret US government 
> document obtained by the public interest law firm, Judicial Watch, shows 
> that Western governments deliberately allied with al-Qaeda and other 
> Islamist extremist groups to topple Syrian dictator Bashir al-Assad.
>
> According to investigative reporter Nafeez Ahmed in Medium, the "leaked 
> document reveals that in coordination with the Gulf states and Turkey, the 
> West intentionally sponsored violent Islamist groups to destabilize Assad, 
> despite anticipating that doing so could lead to the emergence of an 
> ‘Islamic State’ in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
>
> According to the newly declassified US document, the Pentagon foresaw the 
> likely rise of the ‘Islamic State’ as a direct consequence of the strategy, 
> but described this outcome as a strategic opportunity to “isolate the 
> Syrian regime.” 
>
> And not just that: as we reported last week 
> <http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-05-22/how-you-boost-gdp-us-sells-over-4-billion-weapons-israel-iran-and-saudi-arabia>,
>  
> now that ISIS is running around the middle east, cutting people's heads of 
> in 1080p quality and Hollywood-quality (perhaps literally) video, the US 
> has a credible justification to sell billions worth of modern, 
> sophisticated weapons in the region in order to "modernize" and "replenish" 
> the weapons of such US allies as Saudi Arabia, Israel and Iraq.
>
> But that the US military-industrial complex is a winner every time war 
> breaks out anywhere in the world (usually with the assistance of the CIA) 
> is clear to everyone by now. What wasn't clear is just how the US 
> predetermined the current course of events in the middle east.
>
> Now, thanks to the following declassified report, we have a far better 
> understanding of not only how current events in the middle east came to be, 
> but what America's puppermaster role leading up to it all, was. 
>
> From Nafeez Ahmed: Secret Pentagon report reveals West saw ISIS as 
> strategic asset Anti-ISIS coalition knowingly sponsored violent extremists 
> to ‘isolate’ Assad, rollback ‘Shia expansion', originally posted in Medium 
> <https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/secret-pentagon-report-reveals-west-saw-isis-as-strategic-asset-b99ad7a29092>
> .
>
> [image: []] 
> <http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2015/05/isis%20US%20role.jpeg>
>
> Hypocrisy
>
>  
>
> The revelations contradict the official line of Western government on 
> their policies in Syria, and raise disturbing questions about secret 
> Western support for violent extremists abroad, while using the burgeoning 
> threat of terror to justify excessive mass surveillance and crackdowns on 
> civil liberties at home.
>
> Among the batch of documents obtained by Judicial Watch through a federal 
> lawsuit, released earlier this week, is a US Defense Intelligence Agency 
> (DIA) document 
> <http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Pg.-291-Pgs.-287-293-JW-v-DOD-and-State-14-812-DOD-Release-2015-04-10-final-version11.pdf>
>  
> then classified as “secret,” dated 12th August 2012.
>
> The DIA provides military intelligence in support of planners, 
> policymakers and operations for the US Department of Defense and 
> intelligence community.
>
> So far, media reporting has focused on the evidence that the Obama 
> administration knew of arms supplies from a Libyan terrorist stronghold to 
> rebels in Syria.
>
> Some outlets have reported the US intelligence community’s internal 
> prediction of the rise of ISIS. Yet none have accurately acknowledged the 
> disturbing details exposing how the West knowingly fostered a sectarian, 
> al-Qaeda-driven rebellion in Syria.
>
> Charles Shoebridge, a former British Army and Metropolitan Police 
> counter-terrorism intelligence officer, said:
>
> “Given the political leanings of the organisation that obtained these 
> documents, it’s unsurprising that the main emphasis given to them thus far 
> has been an attempt to embarrass Hilary Clinton regarding what was known 
> about the attack on the US consulate in Benghazi in 2012. However, the 
> documents also contain far less publicized revelations that raise vitally 
> important questions of the West’s governments and media in their support of 
> Syria’s rebellion.”
>
>
>
>
> *The West’s Islamists*The newly declassified DIA document 
> <http://www.judicialwatch.org/document-archive/pgs-287-293-291-jw-v-dod-and-state-14-812-2/>
>  
> from 2012 confirms that the main component of the anti-Assad rebel forces 
> by this time comprised Islamist insurgents affiliated to groups that would 
> lead to the emergence of ISIS. Despite this, these groups were to continue 
> receiving support from Western militaries and their regional allies.
>
> Noting that “the Salafist [sic], the Muslim Brotherhood, and AQI [al-Qaeda 
> in Iraq] are the major forces driving the insurgency in Syria,” the 
> document states that “the West, Gulf countries, and Turkey support the 
> opposition,” while Russia, China and Iran “support the [Assad] regime.”
>
> The 7-page DIA document states that al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), the precursor 
> to the ‘Islamic State in Iraq,’ (ISI) which became the ‘Islamic State in 
> Iraq and Syria,’ “supported the Syrian opposition from the beginning, both 
> ideologically and through the media.”
>
> The formerly secret Pentagon report notes that the “rise of the insurgency 
> in Syria” has increasingly taken a “sectarian direction,” attracting 
> diverse support from Sunni “religious and tribal powers” across the region.
>
> In a section titled ‘The Future Assumptions of the Crisis,’ the DIA report 
> predicts that while Assad’s regime will survive, retaining control over 
> Syrian territory, the crisis will continue to escalate “into proxy war.”
>
> The document also recommends the creation of “safe havens under 
> international sheltering, similar to what transpired in Libya when Benghazi 
> was chosen as the command centre for the temporary government.”
>
> In Libya, anti-Gaddafi rebels, most of whom were al-Qaeda affiliated 
> militias, were protected 
> <http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/good-news-uk-counter-extremism-plans-could-be-used-silence-katie-hopkins-1353190385>
>  
> by NATO ‘safe havens’ (aka ‘no fly zones’).
>
>
>
> *‘Supporting powers want’ ISIS entity*In a strikingly prescient 
> prediction, the Pentagon document explicitly forecasts the probable 
> declaration of “an Islamic State through its union with other terrorist 
> organizations in Iraq and Syria.”
>
> Nevertheless, “Western countries, the Gulf states and Turkey are 
> supporting these efforts” by Syrian “opposition forces” fighting to 
> “control the eastern areas (Hasaka and Der Zor), adjacent to Western Iraqi 
> provinces (Mosul and Anbar)”:
>
> “… there is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared 
> Salafist Principality in eastern Syria (Hasaka and Der Zor), and this is 
> exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to 
> isolate the Syrian regime, which is considered the strategic depth of the 
> Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran).”
>
> The secret Pentagon document thus provides extraordinary confirmation that 
> the US-led coalition currently fighting ISIS, had three years ago welcomed 
> the emergence of an extremist “Salafist Principality” in the region as a 
> way to undermine Assad, and block off the strategic expansion of Iran. 
> Crucially, Iraq is labeled as an integral part of this “Shia expansion.”
>
> The establishment of such a “Salafist Principality” in eastern Syria, the 
> DIA document asserts, is “exactly” what the “supporting powers to the 
> [Syrian] opposition want.” Earlier on, the document repeatedly describes 
> those “supporting powers” as “the West, Gulf countries, and Turkey.”
>
> Further on, the document reveals that Pentagon analysts were acutely aware 
> of the dire risks of this strategy, yet ploughed ahead anyway.
>
> The establishment of such a “Salafist Principality” in eastern Syria, it 
> says, would create “the ideal atmosphere for AQI to return to its old 
> pockets in Mosul and Ramadi.” Last summer, ISIS conquered Mosul in Iraq, 
> and just this month has also taken control of Ramadi.
>
> Such a quasi-state entity will provide:
>
> “… a renewed momentum under the presumption of unifying the jihad among 
> Sunni Iraq and Syria, and the rest of the Sunnis in the Arab world against 
> what it considers one enemy. ISI could also declare an Islamic State 
> through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria, 
> which will create grave danger in regards to unifying Iraq and the 
> protection of territory.”
>
> The 2012 DIA document is an Intelligence Information Report (IIR), not a 
> “finally evaluated intelligence” assessment, but its contents are vetted 
> before distribution. The report was circulated throughout the US 
> intelligence community, including to the State Department, Central Command, 
> the Department of Homeland Security, the CIA, FBI, among other agencies.
>
> In response to my questions about the strategy, the British government 
> simply denied the Pentagon report’s startling revelations of deliberate 
> Western sponsorship of violent extremists in Syria. A British Foreign 
> Office spokesperson said:
>
> “AQ and ISIL are proscribed terrorist organisations. The UK opposes all 
> forms of terrorism. AQ, ISIL, and their affiliates pose a direct threat to 
> the UK’s national security. We are part of a military and political 
> coalition to defeat ISIL in Iraq and Syria, and are working with 
> international partners to counter the threat from AQ and other terrorist 
> groups in that region. In Syria we have always supported those moderate 
> opposition groups who oppose the tyranny of Assad and the brutality of the 
> extremists.”
>
> The DIA did not respond to request for comment.
>
>
>
> *Strategic asset for regime-change*Security analyst Shoebridge, however, 
> who has tracked Western support for Islamist terrorists in Syria since the 
> beginning of the war, pointed out that the secret Pentagon intelligence 
> report exposes fatal contradictions at the heart of official pronunciations:
>
> “Throughout the early years of the Syria crisis, the US and UK 
> governments, and almost universally the West’s mainstream media, promoted 
> Syria’s rebels as moderate, liberal, secular, democratic, and therefore 
> deserving of the West’s support. Given that these documents wholly 
> undermine this assessment, it’s significant that the West’s media has now, 
> despite their immense significance, almost entirely ignored them.”
>
> According to Brad Hoff, a former US Marine who served during the early 
> years of the Iraq War and as a 9/11 first responder at the Marine Corps 
> Headquarters in Battalion Quantico from 2000 to 2004, the just released 
> Pentagon report for the first time provides stunning affirmation that:
>
> “US intelligence predicted the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and the 
> Levant (ISIL or ISIS), but instead of clearly delineating the group as an 
> enemy, the report envisions the terror group as a US strategic asset.”
>
> Hoff, who is managing editor of Levant Report 
> <http://levantreport.com/2015/05/19/2012-defense-intelligence-agency-document-west-will-facilitate-rise-of-islamic-state-in-order-to-isolate-the-syrian-regime/>
>  
> ­ ?an online publication run by Texas-based educators who have direct 
> experience of the Middle East?­?points out that the DIA document 
> “matter-of-factly” states that the rise of such an extremist Salafist 
> political entity in the region offers a “tool for regime change in Syria.”
>
> The DIA intelligence report shows, he said, that the rise of ISIS only 
> became possible in the context of the Syrian insurgency?­?“there is no 
> mention of US troop withdrawal from Iraq as a catalyst for Islamic State’s 
> rise, which is the contention of innumerable politicians and pundits.” The 
> report demonstrates that:
>
> “The establishment of a ‘Salafist Principality’ in Eastern Syria is 
> ‘exactly’ what the external powers supporting the opposition want 
> (identified as ‘the West, Gulf Countries, and Turkey’) in order to weaken 
> the Assad government.”
>
> The rise of a Salafist quasi-state entity that might expand into Iraq, and 
> fracture that country, was therefore clearly foreseen by US intelligence as 
> likely?­?but nevertheless strategically useful?­?blowback from the West’s 
> commitment to “isolating Syria.”
>
>
>
> *Complicity*Critics of the US-led strategy in the region have repeatedly 
> raised questions about the role of coalition allies in intentionally 
> providing extensive support to Islamist terrorist groups in the drive to 
> destabilize the Assad regime in Syria.
>
> The conventional wisdom is that the US government did not retain 
> sufficient oversight on the funding to anti-Assad rebel groups, which was 
> supposed to be monitored and vetted to ensure that only ‘moderate’ groups 
> were supported.
>
> However, the newly declassified Pentagon report proves unambiguously that 
> years before ISIS launched its concerted offensive against Iraq, the US 
> intelligence community was fully aware that Islamist militants constituted 
> the core of Syria’s sectarian insurgency.
>
> Despite that, the Pentagon continued to support the Islamist insurgency, 
> even while anticipating the probability that doing so would establish an 
> extremist Salafi stronghold in Syria and Iraq.
>
> As Shoebridge told me, “The documents show that not only did the US 
> government at the latest by August 2012 know the true extremist nature and 
> likely outcome of Syria’s rebellion”?­?namely, the emergence of ISIS?­?“but 
> that this was considered an advantage for US foreign policy. This also 
> suggests a decision to spend years in an effort to deliberately mislead the 
> West’s public, via a compliant media, into believing that Syria’s rebellion 
> was overwhelmingly ‘moderate.’”
>
> Annie Machon 
> <http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/oct/24/mi6-whistleblowers-accuses-intelligence-agencies-annie-machon>,
>  
> a former MI5 intelligence officer who blew the whistle 
> <http://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/nov/15/gender.uk> in the 1990s on 
> MI6 funding of al-Qaeda to assassinate Libya’s former leader Colonel 
> Gaddafi, similarly said of the revelations:
>
> “This is no surprise to me. Within individual countries there are always 
> multiple intelligence agencies with competing agendas.”
>
> She explained that MI6’s Libya operation in 1996, which resulted in the 
> deaths of innocent people, “happened at precisely the time when MI5 was 
> setting up a new section to investigate al-Qaeda.”
>
> This strategy was repeated on a grand scale in the 2011 NATO intervention 
> in Libya, said Machon, where the CIA and MI6 were:
>
> “… supporting the very same Libyan groups, resulting in a failed state, 
> mass murder, displacement and anarchy. So the idea that elements of the 
> American military-security complex have enabled the development of ISIS 
> after their failed attempt to get NATO to once again ‘intervene’ is part of 
> an established pattern. And they remain indifferent to the sheer scale of 
> human suffering that is unleashed as a result of such game-playing.”
>
>
>
>
> *Divide and rule*Several US government officials have conceded that their 
> closest allies in the anti-ISIS coalition were funding violent extremist 
> Islamist groups that became integral to ISIS.
>
> US Vice President Joe Biden, for instance, admitted 
> <http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/cancer-modern-capitalism-1323585268> 
> last year that Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar and Turkey had funneled 
> hundreds of millions of dollars to Islamist rebels in Syria that 
> metamorphosed into ISIS.
>
> But he did not admit what this internal Pentagon document 
> demonstrates?­?that the entire covert strategy was sanctioned and 
> supervised 
> <http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/cancer-modern-capitalism-1323585268> 
> by the US, Britain, France, Israel and other Western powers.
>
> The strategy appears to fit a policy scenario identified by a recent US 
> Army-commissioned RAND Corp report 
> <http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/pentagon-plan-divide-and-rule-muslim-world-1690265165#sthash.N7UEf4Dc.dpuf>
> .
>
> The report, published four years before the DIA document, called for the 
> US “to capitalise on the Shia-Sunni conflict by taking the side of the 
> conservative Sunni regimes in a decisive fashion and working with them 
> against all Shiite empowerment movements in the Muslim world.”
>
> The US would need to contain “Iranian power and influence” in the Gulf by 
> “shoring up the traditional Sunni regimes in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and 
> Pakistan.” Simultaneously, the US must maintain “a strong strategic 
> relationship with the Iraqi Shiite government” despite its Iran alliance.
>
> The RAND report confirmed 
> <http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monographs/2008/RAND_MG738.pdf> 
> that the “divide and rule” strategy was already being deployed “to create 
> divisions in the jihadist camp. Today in Iraq such a strategy is being used 
> at the tactical level.”
>
> The report observed that the US was forming “temporary alliances” with 
> al-Qaeda affiliated “nationalist insurgent groups” that have fought the US 
> for four years in the form of “weapons and cash.” Although these 
> nationalists “have cooperated with al-Qaeda against US forces,” they are 
> now being supported to exploit “the common threat that al-Qaeda now poses 
> to both parties.”
>
> The 2012 DIA document, however, further shows that while sponsoring 
> purportedly former al-Qaeda insurgents in Iraq to counter al-Qaeda, Western 
> governments were simultaneously arming al-Qaeda insurgents in Syria.
>
> The revelation from an internal US intelligence document that the very 
> US-led coalition supposedly fighting ‘Islamic State’ today, knowingly 
> created ISIS in the first place, raises troubling questions about recent 
> government efforts to justify the expansion of state anti-terror powers.
>
> In the wake of the rise of ISIS, intrusive new measures to combat 
> extremism including mass surveillance, the Orwellian ‘prevent duty’ and 
> even plans to enable government censorship of broadcasters, are being 
> pursued on both sides of the Atlantic, much of which disproportionately 
> targets activists, journalists and ethnic minorities, especially Muslims.
>
> Yet the new Pentagon report reveals that, contrary to Western government 
> claims, the primary cause of the threat comes from their own deeply 
> misguided policies of secretly sponsoring Islamist terrorism for dubious 
> geopolitical purposes.
>
>
>
> http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-05-23/secret-pentagon-report-reveals-us-created-isis-tool-overthrow-syrias-president-assad
>  
>

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to